You know what, though? I’m tired of people assuming racism until proven innocent. It’s bullshit, and if people are doing that, they are the jackass.
Racial prejudice exists on a pretty broad spectrum.
There’s hard-core racism, like the shit I grew up with (extended family in the KKK.)
There’s prejudice, like my grandmother who whined about black people using the community pool and filling it up with their hair product.
There’s willful ignorance, like people who think black people are poor because they make bad decisions while refusing to look at the context in which those decisions are made.
There’s plain old ignorance, like Bill Maher using the word ‘‘nigger’’ without really thinking about what it would mean coming from him, and then setting himself straight.
Then, like really down on the totem pole, I would identify ‘‘failure to recognize one’s own privilege,’’ which is problematic but not racism.
We have a tendency to group all these things together into one monolithic RACIST label without applying a modicum of critical thinking to the actual situation, or reacting in a proportionate way to the alleged crime.
It seems like you are demanding empathy for the people theoretically-but-not-actually oppressed by the word ‘‘Dingo’’ but not with the person who has been publicly slapped in the face with one of the most socially derisive insults around today. I’m not thrilled that the guy lost his shit in response, but what she said/did was ignorant and rude. Here’s a much better approach she could have used: “Hey, do you know what I heard? That the word ‘‘dingo’’ is derived from the racial slur ‘‘mandingo,’’ did you know that?”
Squallous option A: That’s not actually true. Because blah blah blah Squallous option B: Wow, I didn’t know that. I will henceforth refrain from that word. Squallous option C: Who gives a shit?
Ah, but what if you simply want to take your dog to the vet and go home and don’t *want *to spend the rest of your day simpering before and soothing the offended feelings of someone who is angry and stupid? I think this principle applies to many real life situations, too.
Sorry, but there are no productive conversations with someone who casually tosses accusations like “racist” around simply because their feelings are hurt.
And if those people bother you so much, and you truly feel that you cannot have a dialuge with them, then it is absolutly your right to simply ignore them and go about your day.
This is not what you do, you instead go onto message boards and explain just how very much their opinions on these matters bother you.
When you describe them as “flinging spittle-flecked abuse”, you are engaging in a hyperbole that is little better than if they were to imply that another is a racist.
You are injecting your own opinion and bias into the interaction, and shutting down any possibility of reasonable dialogue when you resort to such tactics.
And sure, there is going to be a small minority of any group that cannot be reasoned with, especially when you are talking about college students. I don’t know how old you are, but assuming that you have made it into your 30’s at this point, think about how many stupid things you did when you were in your early 20’s.
That’s just the curse of being young. Not all young people are all that rational. I didn’t see him taking the “abuse” from a group of peers, but more like a parent tolerating the tantrums of a young child.
My take home is this.
It costs nothing to assume that your opponent is on the level and arguing in good faith. If you continue to stay on the level and argue in good faith, then their bad faith arguments will fall apart, and be easily exposed, and they may even learn something from it themselves. They may not have even realized that their argument was logically flawed, and instead simply picked up the talking points from someone else. There are many reasons why someone may argue poorly, and even not in good faith, that are still worth engaging. They may have legitimately thought that yours was a racist perspective, they may have really thought that niggardly (an ugly word, to be sure, even if not related to any racist root), or dingo had their roots in racism. Telling them to piss off only reinforces their belief that you are a shitty person, and reinforces their belief that it is shitty people who act in these perceived racist ways.
It is only when someone is deliberately trolling and looking for reactions (more common on the internet than IRL, if nothing else, you can’t punch a troll in the face on the internet) that a dialogue is pointless, but you will not know that until they have revealed their intentions.
Now, if you go online, and you are actually looking for blogs that are accusing others of racism, then you are likely going to find any number you wish of examples of poor arguments for why a person or an action is racist, but then you will also find as many or more examples of why big foot or UFO’s exist. You will also find about as many examples of actual self-described racists and white supremacists. Point there is, if you go looking for something online, I guarantee that you will find it, so don’t go looking for something that will offend you, and get surprised when you are offended.
Jumping to that assumption in the first place is shutting down the dialogue much more effectively than the accusation in the first place.
I’m a white guy. I’ve been accused of being a racist at times.
Most of the time, it was due to a lack of perception on their part, misunderstanding my actions or feelings for one where I feel that others are inferior due to the color of their skin or other genetic heritage.
When I was a chef, I laid down some scathing commentary on one of my black cooks, and got talked to by HR about being racist, even though I treated my white and hispanic cooks the same way without complaint. I felt it was unfair, but at the very least, I learned to be a bit nicer to everyone, that makes it much easier, as then I didn’t have to worry about someone thinking that I was being mean to them for racist reasons, because I wasn’t being mean to anyone at all. I don’t think I learned anything about race in those conversations, but I did learn that the way I was treating my charges did upset them sometimes, and it created a better environment when I treated everyone a bit better.
If someone feels as though they are being disrespected or abused, they may lash out in return with an incorrect formulation as to what is is that is causing them to receive this disrespect or abuse, but that is not a time to get defensive and tell them that they are wrong as to why they are getting this treatment. It is better to listen, and find the ways they feel that they are disrespected or abused, and address those concerns.
Once those concerns are corrected, once they are not being disrespected or abused, then it become much easier to then have a conversation about how they are not being disrespected or abused due to racism.
Yes, this is quite productive after I had to tell a guy to leave a female friend of mine alone after SHE told him 3 times to stop touching her. I should have discussed his feelings about what caused him to think I was racist. :rolleyes:
One anecdote certainly disproves the assertion. After all, if a particular approach doesn’t work for a single asshole, that must mean it never works for anyone.
Well, surprisingly, I don’t get accused of being a racist all that often. Since, you know, I’m not a racist. Nor do I act in ways that may lead to others thinking I’m racist. So, the times it has come up has been an asshole who casually tosses the word at me like it harms me some how. Productive dialog with those types of people is not possible, nor something I’m willing to waste my time on. There are many people to have a productive dialog with, I don’t need to do have it with everyone. YOU may say you care about everyone’s feelings, but I guarantee you that you don’t. People who call others racists simply because their feelings are hurt are not in the group I care about. YMMV.
This reminds me of when a cousin of mine was a manager at a McDonalds. A black employee that she fired went to the NAACP accusing her of being a racist and saying that most of the people she fired were black. She had to go to a meeting with that person and their representative–where she brought the records showing that most of the people she fired were black because most of the people she hired were black (and the majority of people working at the location) and records of all the missed shifts and problems at work the employee had been written up for before finally being fired. After the meeting was over the representative actually apologized to her for having had to waste her time.
That sort of thing happens. When I was an employee at Wendy’s, I had a co-worker who showed up late quite often, if at all.
Finally, she didn’t show up all weekend, with no call.
When she got taken off the schedule (fired) she complained of racism to the GM.
The GM told her she was welcome to take it up with the lawyers at corporate.
I don’t think she did, that was the last we heard of her. There are in fact absolutely times when such charges should be simply dismissed, once the context is understood.
I absolutely agree that the charge of racism is often used as an insult, rather than a well thought out and accurate description of the perception of the effects of another actions. But that does not mean that all, or even most accusations are. Many could be misinterpreting your actions through a lense that sees disrespect directed towards them as stemming from a racial bias, because to be quite honest, it is very likely that some or even much of the disrespect encountered by ethnic minorities does in fact come from a place of racial bias.
You are basically saying that the onus should be upon the aggrieved party to understand why it is that they are being disrespected in this particular instance, and how and why that is different from when they are disrespected by those who are open about their racism.
In Manson’s case, the guy was being disrespected because he did not deserve respect, as he did not afford others the respect of personal autonomy and privacy. However, if he is often given disrespect specifically because of his race, he may not understand how to articulate the difference, and instead lashed out in the way that most makes sense to him. He was wrong, both in the initial confrontation and in his response, but he was not coming from a “I want to make people feel uncomfortable by calling them this vile thing” perspective, but a “people are always disrespecting me because of my race, and now this person is disrespecting me, it must be because of my race” perspective. Which, I reiterate, is wrong, but is an understandable reaction to someone who grows up steeped in an environment that makes it clear that he is being treated differently from a large segment of the population, and that segment that is treated better has a different skin color. Causation or not, nearly everyone sees correlation as being more important than it really is, so that’s not something you can really blame on him. (And you can absolutely blame him for not respecting your friend’s autonomy and privacy, that part is simply being an asshole. I mean who grabs women without their consent, anyway?)
Did you even read my first post (upthread) about being accused of racism because I called my dog a dingo? That has actually zero in common with a racist.
(Wait a sec… I woke up this morning… and somewhere a RACIST woke up this morning… I have something in common with a racist… OMG racism? No, OMG SJW bullshit.)
I did. And came to the conclusion that the idiot who made that judgement about my actions did so because she thought “dingo” was a racial epithet. She was wrong.
So lemme get this straight… my options are:
(1) to own up to it, which proves I’m a racist
(2) deny it, which also proves I’m a racist
Is that what you’re saying?
But I don’t. I don’t feel this way. And calling my dog a dingo does not, in any way, indicate otherwise.
…aaaaand we’ve come full circle. You clearly didn’t read my initial post. This is exactly what happened. Well, almost. She perceived something that totally, 100%, unequivocally, unquestionably was not a slight to anyone as racism, and I did use that chance to have a teachable moment with her.
Understanding how someone reaches a certain state does not necessarily mean excusing or forgiving it. I can understand how someone growing up in a horrible home environment can strongly shape their turning out to be a thief or murderer, and that if circumstances were different they could have been productive citizens with decent lives. In fact, I don’t believe in “free will”–we don’t have choice in either our nature or our nurture–but I still think that dangerous criminals should be locked in cages. Similarly, you could choose to be forgiving with someone who accuses you of something awful at work because you understand their background–but going scorched earth on them is an equally valid option. If someone attempts to screw with you, it is perfectly rational to take measures to shut that shit down.
Ummm… yes. Yes, the onus is entirely upon someone who feels that they are the aggrieved party to understand why it is that they feel aggrieved. If they don’t have a valid basis for it, for example due to their own ignorance (e.g. the definition of “dingo”), then their aggrieved status may be safely dismissed.
They had had a number of conversations throughout her employment.
She was no longer an employee, and therefore not his concern. He did invite her to have a dialogue with others, which, anytime anyone mentions a lawsuit or other form of tort, is who we are supposed to refer them to.
I have said that you are welcome to simply dismiss the charges of racism if you don’t feel that they apply to you, but that is not a good way to have a dialogue in which at least one of you may learn something. If that is not your desire, then go about your business.
If you physically harm someone, with no intent of your own, then do you feel that the onus should be upon the aggrieved party to understand why you have harmed them?
Just because the harm that you may unintentionally cause is not physical does not make it any less real.
Yes, but I was responding to the dialogue that you wrote, in which you were accused of being a vile thing, and implied that you should just let it happen.
I was giving other options, as there are actually a near infinite number of other options in between “letting it happen” and getting angry and shutting down the dialogue.
And so she was. I would think that such a thing would be weird, hell my vet called my dog a dingo once, and while I thought that was a little breedist, I certainly didn’t take it as racist.
She may have learned something. She may not have admitted it to you, as it is often difficult to admit that you are wrong when being confronted, but she may not make that sort of accusation again.
Nope.
I was specifically saying that limiting it to those two options is the incorrect way of going abut things, and that there is a near infinite number of other options in the middle that you have excluded there.
I did not say that you did, just that if someone want sot be a racist, (and there are actual racists out there, that truly do feel it is apprpriate to treat someone as lessor becuase of their genetic heritage), then they may as well own up to it.
…aaaaand we’ve come full circle. You clearly didn’t read my initial post. This is exactly what happened. Well, almost. She perceived something that totally, 100%, unequivocally, unquestionably was not a slight to anyone as racism, and I did use that chance to have a teachable moment with her.
[/QUOTE]
I did read your first post.
But I was not responding to that post, I was responding to your implication that there is no dialogue possible once you have been called this “vile” thing, which is highly implied by your “Shhh. just lay there and take it” bit.
I mostly agree with you up until the “–”, as I do not think that scorched earth is a good idea for anyone. It may make you feel better about yourself, in that you managed to shout and shut down someone you disagree with, but it is only going to make them more likely to consider the sorts of things that you did that they perceived as being slights against them due to their race to be justified. And this is assuming that you are correct in that someone is trying to screw with you, and is not open to a dialogue that you are taking measure to shut the shit down upon.
Non-racists can still make mistakes, and say or do something racist or bigoted. Just like well-meaning people can sometimes make mistakes about something they see or hear that strikes them as racist or bigoted.
Sure, assholes can be assholes too, but if you dismiss all accusations, questions, or challenges to something you said or did as the behavior of assholes, you might be missing some opportunities to improve yourself.
So first they get to accuse you of something, then they are owed a dialogue with you? What about “no platforming” them? What if you think that you don’t owe them one single second of your time?
I am just explaining that, if your desire is to have a productive conversation, then shouting them down with a scorched earth strategy may not be the best bet.
If you do not wish to have a productive conversation with them, or do not feel that one would be possible, then you are welcome to shout them down, or just walk away, or whatever.
But you are giving them far more than that amount of time by then going onto social media places and complaining about their actions. Just as they are going to their social media place and complaining about yours.